President Donald Trump’s efforts to end birthright citizenship through an Executive Order are gaining momentum as nearly two dozen State Attorneys General rally behind the initiative.
At a Glance
- Trump aims to eliminate birthright citizenship via Executive Order
- 18 State Attorneys General have signed an amicus brief supporting the move
- Supporters argue birthright citizenship incentivizes illegal immigration
- Republican lawmakers are pushing for legislative changes to address the issue
Growing Support for Trump’s Executive Order
A coalition of State Attorneys General is throwing its weight behind President Donald Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship. The group, comprising legal representatives from 18 states, contends that current immigration policies place undue strain on state resources and budgets due to rising illegal immigration stemming from birthright citizenship provisions.
If he gets the support of enough states, he could even make his order an amendment to the constitution, if necessary.
The Attorneys General supporting this initiative hail from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Their collective stance reflects a growing concern among conservative states about the impact of birthright citizenship on immigration patterns and state finances.
The State Attorneys General have signed an amicus brief arguing that birthright citizenship serves as a powerful incentive for illegal immigration, ultimately leading to increased costs for states. This legal document provides crucial support for Trump’s executive order, potentially strengthening its position in the face of expected legal challenges.
“President Trump is right: we must restore the meaning and value of American citizenship. For too long, mass numbers of illegal aliens and foreign tourists—especially from China—have been entering our country just to give birth here and hand their kids American citizenship. On top of that, taxpayers are on the hook to pay for it. I’m defending President Trump’s Executive Order that closes the birthright citizenship loophole and eliminates the incentive for illegal immigration. No one should be rewarded for breaking the law,” Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said.
Too right!
Bird’s statement encapsulates the sentiment shared by many of the supporting attorneys general. They argue that ending birthright citizenship could significantly reduce the pressures associated with undocumented immigration and refocus the significance of American citizenship.
While the executive branch pursues change through an Executive Order, Republican members of Congress are taking a parallel approach. They have introduced legislation aimed at amending the Immigration and Nationality Act to redefine who is considered a U.S. citizen at birth. This two-pronged strategy demonstrates a coordinated effort to address the issue of birthright citizenship comprehensively.
The proposed legislative changes seek to clarify and potentially restrict the criteria for automatic citizenship, aligning with the broader goal of reducing incentives for illegal immigration. This move by Congress underscores the complexity of the issue and the need for a multi-faceted approach to immigration reform.
The push to end birthright citizenship is not without controversy. Critics argue that such a move could lead to a host of legal and ethical issues, potentially affecting long-standing interpretations of the 14th Amendment. However, supporters of the initiative maintain that the benefits to state budgets and immigration control outweigh these concerns.
Because, obviously!
